I'm afraid these girls may be trying to be royals in the compassionate and humanitarian Diana mould, but they need to remember that the post-divorce (and even the post-separation) Diana was in a different position from the position they're in. After the divorce she wasn't an HRH with a need to tread carefully in political areas, whereas Beatrice and Eugenie do have those restrictions, however inconvenient that might be for Sarah.

At the moment it's really hard, though. A lot of members here have said that the princesses should be spending more time doing royal sorts of things and be seen more with Andrew and the rest of the royals rather than being used by Sarah to give her charities a higher profile at glitzy events. Yet when Eugenie accompanied Andrew on a recent trip it was immediately criticised as a boondoggle and an unnecessary extra expense. If these girls start realising that whatever they do, it'll be wrong, that's asking for them to stop trying to do the right thing on the grounds that they can't do it right for a lot of people (including the good old Mail) regardless of what they do.

I think part of the problem is that most people don't really know what the York girls will be doing in the future where royal duties are concerned, so nobody really knows what, if anything, they're being trained for and there are all sorts of rumours flying around. So whenever the girls are out doing anything, a lot of people are second-guessing them and trying to figure out what their position actually is, and there are just a lot of mixed signals being sent. Since Sarah makes her own money, she has a degree of independence from the royals and can go out and do her own thing if she wants to, which makes her daughters' position even less clear. I know it's been said for a long time that the Queen is rather hands-off with her family, but I think there are some dangers in letting these situations with the York girls and William just meander along with nobody really knowing what's happening but suspecting that they aren't giving value for money and are undermining the royal family in the process.

There is one big difference though. European inspectors could actually have done something Sarah may be good at weight watchers but as a champion of human rights working without the approval of her government she canīt.
Something confuses me, inspectors couldnīt get within 500 yards of the inmates, then who did they think Sarah and her daughter and the TV crew were? Did she use her daughterīs royal title to get in? If not how on earth were they allowed to do this what were they pretending to be. I am sorry I didnīt see the programme so this may have been explained.

This is my concern as well, Elspeth. Assuming that Beatrice and Eugenie are idealistic young ladies who really want to serve people and do something to make peoples' lives better, all the criticism that hits them whenever they do anything must be terribly discouraging. They've just stepped out and tried to make their mark on the world, and had their fingers slapped for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth

At the moment it's really hard, though. A lot of members here have said that the princesses should be spending more time doing royal sorts of things and be seen more with Andrew and the rest of the royals rather than being used by Sarah to give her charities a higher profile at glitzy events. Yet when Eugenie accompanied Andrew on a recent trip it was immediately criticised as a boondoggle and an unnecessary extra expense. If these girls start realising that whatever they do, it'll be wrong, that's asking for them to stop trying to do the right thing on the grounds that they can't do it right for a lot of people (including the good old Mail) regardless of what they do.

Apparently Sarah posed as someone who was interested in supporting the orphanage as a charitable endeavor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Menarue

There is one big difference though. European inspectors could actually have done something Sarah may be good at weight watchers but as a champion of human rights working without the approval of her government she canīt.
Something confuses me, inspectors couldnīt get within 500 yards of the inmates, then who did they think Sarah and her daughter and the TV crew were? Did she use her daughterīs royal title to get in? If not how on earth were they allowed to do this what were they pretending to be. I am sorry I didnīt see the programme so this may have been explained.

If the facts in the article are to be believed, the filming was done secretly and, in the worst of the places, Sarah went in without her daughters and in disguise.

What exactly do you think the inspectors could have done? At the very most, their findings would influence a negative vote on Turkey's EU membership assuming that they also went in these places disguised, which is highly unlikely considering the political blowback that would create. If you think it is a scandal for the mother of minor princesses to go in under false pretenses, think about the uproar if it was offical representatives of the EU! They can only comment on what they are allowed to see and, as inspectors, I'm afraid it mostly likely isn't much that is negative.

I didn't hear about the charitable interest angle. I hope that the person making the documentary lives up to it. These people can use all the help they can get.

I really donīt think that it is a scandal for the mother of the princesses to go into a foreign country all disguised under false pretenses to make a documentary, she is a free citizen but she should not have taken the princess (or was it both). It is a little like the high society woman driving down into the slums and showing her children how some people live and then they all go home and are served by their many servants a sumptious afternoon tea....
If this does any good then bravo! But I am afraid it is just another case of poor judgement on the part of Sarah, however well meaning, and that she has just caused problems for her country and her daughters and really I doubt that it will do much good for the orphans. I think the only good that this has done is that it has made Sarah feel as though she is the champion of the poverished. Well she ran up so many debts buying clothes etc when she was a royal that she must feel some affinity with the poor, she knows how it feels.
If any good comes from this exercise in charity, then I will say well done and I am sorry I have doubted, but I am afraid I canīt see this doing anything at all except make trouble.
Princess Beatrice said that being royal isnīt just cutting ribbons, right, go and study get a degree and then you will be able to go out and do something really useful and perhaps cut a few ribbons as well and when you cut the ribbons you will be able to understand a little about what this symbolic act is meaning for your country, new jobs, new roads, old peopleīs homes, hospices, things that really matter to many people and their everyday lives.

I still don't see what the major problem is w this trip. Neither Pss B or E spoke up against the country or their politics or anything like that. They reacted like any normal human would when witnessing such abuse and that was with horror and disbelief. All Pss B said was she wanted to have more of an impact in her royal duties than just ribbon cutting, and I think that is a commendable outlook for her to have. She wants to make a difference, isn't that what we want and expect from young people, royal or not? Yes, I agree because of their positions they can not just go out and blindly throw themselves into whatever issue they want, but I think it's says alot that they don't want to just play it safe and coast through life unaffected and indifferent.

The problem, for those who see a problem, is that members of the Royal Family take great care not to be drawn into international affairs, because the Sovereign in the UK is not to be political in a national or international sense. What has happened is that the Queen has been drawn into an international incident because of the documentary about the orphanages and Turkey's response about it. Had Sarah gone by herself, there wouldn't be so much of an outcry. But the fact that she took her daughters along--who are Princesses of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland--made this seem like much more than an unofficial, private visit to the orphanages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bella

I still don't see what the major problem is w this trip. Neither Pss B or E spoke up against the country or their politics or anything like that. They reacted like any normal human would when witnessing such abuse and that was with horror and disbelief. All Pss B said was she wanted to have more of an impact in her royal duties than just ribbon cutting, and I think that is a commendable outlook for her to have. She wants to make a difference, isn't that what we want and expect from young people, royal or not? Yes, I agree because of their positions they can not just go out and blindly throw themselves into whatever issue they want, but I think it's says alot that they don't want to just play it safe and coast through life unaffected and indifferent.

---snipped----
Sarah made this trip and she took her royal daughters with her. Their presence put a bigger spotlight on a horrible situation than had been reported on before.

It was widely reported in the UK after the first trip, there was nothing to suggest that it would not have caused another outcry resulting in action had Sarah merely asked for it to be reported on again, without involving HM's grandchildren (as she reminds everyone) or gaining publicity for herself. I as with many have to wonder why she chose to involve her daughters in such a deceit

Quote:

I think it is a bit naive to believe that the European inspectors would have ever been allowed within 500 yards of the inmates that were photographed during Sarah's visit. Everything would have been made all 'shiny and new' before they ever got there, or at least everything that they would have been allowed to see would have been.---snipped-----

I probably have a better grasp than some of those that are perhaps suggesting I am the one who is naive. Perhaps they do not arrange LEGAL spot visits in the US?

It is naive to try to gloss over the ramifications of deception whilst meddling in the affairs of another country, without approval of your own government. What an outcry if Sarah and her royal daughters had been arrested for failing to honestly represent themselves.

The problem, for those who see a problem, is that members of the Royal Family take great care not to be drawn into international affairs, because the Sovereign in the UK is not to be political in a national or international sense. What has happened is that the Queen has been drawn into an international incident because of the documentary about the orphanages and Turkey's response about it. Had Sarah gone by herself, there wouldn't be so much of an outcry. But the fact that she took her daughters along--who are Princesses of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland--made this seem like much more than an unofficial, private visit to the orphanages.

Exactly, had Sarah gone by herself, we would complain about her being an idiot, using her ex royal status etc, the moment she involved her daughters, she made it political. To mention to the FO that she was taking the girls to Turkey and Romania on holiday should have rung alarm bells and that is the only way I can see how Sarah came by her 'we told all the right people', because if she said we are going to lie our way into orphanages in order to make a TV programme, and nobody said 'you must not involve/endanger their HRH's', would beggar belief!

At the moment it's really hard, though. A lot of members here have said that the princesses should be spending more time doing royal sorts of things and be seen more with Andrew and the rest of the royals rather than being used by Sarah to give her charities a higher profile at glitzy events. Yet when Eugenie accompanied Andrew on a recent trip it was immediately criticised as a boondoggle and an unnecessary extra expense.

As a start, they could become more actively involved in UK charities, especially for youngsters. The boondoggle (????), was not so much because they went abroad with their father, it was because they announced in the one breath it was a gap year (what they meant was a holiday), then when people noticed, no it wasn't, it was 'royal training', Andrew was seen by many to be playing the UK public for fools. Had Buckingham Palace been honest and said, X was having a working holiday with her father before going off to swim the Sahara, very little would have been said. A few grumblings from the MOB's such as myself, but a dead in the water story.

It was widely reported in the UK after the first trip, there was nothing to suggest that it would not have caused another outcry resulting in action had Sarah merely asked for it to be reported on again, without involving HM's grandchildren (as she reminds everyone) or gaining publicity for herself. I as with many have to wonder why she chose to involve her daughters in such a deceitI probably have a better grasp than some of those that are perhaps suggesting I am the one who is naive. Perhaps they do not arrange LEGAL spot visits in the US?

It is naive to try to gloss over the ramifications of deception whilst meddling in the affairs of another country, without approval of your own government. What an outcry if Sarah and her royal daughters had been arrested for failing to honestly represent themselves.

As the US is not currently up for membership in the EU, nor is subjected to spot visits from the EU, perhaps we could not compare apples to oranges?

As you are 'in the know', I would be interested in hearing about how foreign government officials travel to other countries and perform inspections of hot button installations with no advance notice given. Is passport control so bad in Turkey that they are not aware of when these inspectors arrive in their country?

This is a report on human rights in Turkey that mentions the Saray Institute, one of the places that Sarah visited on her own and in disguise (btw, the only royal on the trip, Eugenie, never disguised herself nor misrepresented herself) apparantly after being denied access as Sarah, Duchess of York. It is worth mentioning that this report was made three years ago, well after the EU supposedly was conducting these 'spot inspections'. The description sounds the same as it does now. Bang up job these inspectors are doing.

Apparently and I use that as the programme has not yet aired, Sarah posed as a rich benefactor to gain access for herself and daughter!

-------------Update
Sarah contacted Chris Rogers to do this programme, not he contacted her, based on his original programme in 2006, prior to Rumania joining the EU. Promises were made then based on what he had shown to get membership, many of which have not been made even now.

Eugenie went because 'mummy says it's good for us to see her doing her thing'. At each orphanage the managers were led to believe that Sarah was a wealthy potential donor.

Eugenies quote was basically as I thought.

This programme, whether approved by Andrew or more doubtfully BP is in direct opposition to the governments stance, as announced by Gordon Brown, originally in October 2007 and reiterated since! There were US aid workers present but I understand it receives very little interest in the US, although that is from my own searching and not anything spoken.

Sarahs quote of the programme (oh and there were many), "What have you done today, have you made someone smile", refering to one of the children, well actually yes Sarah, almost 15 of them, there are charities for disabled and disadvantaged children in the UK, how about sending one of your daughters to help at one of those! Her worst was when she was telling a Gypsy mother with 2 babies who, due to no heat, no food and no money she was sending to a better life in one of the orphanges, that "surely you love them" and how she would never give up her babies, The woman has no idea!

Well, I for one - being a US citizen and living in the US - have never heard of anything even remotely close to what Sarah's documentary exposed. I vaguely remember there was a bit on the news for about a second years ago when the Soviet Union collapsed and someone showcased something about orphanages there (and in Romania around the same time), but there's been nothing about any of that since. European social problems are rarely covered here. So my eyes were def. opened to this on-going and terrible situation. I guess the real important thing now is what is going to be done about this?

As the US is not currently up for membership in the EU, nor is subjected to spot visits from the EU, perhaps we could not compare apples to oranges?

It was a simply question, I think all in the UK would presume that your nursing homes and orphanages are subject to inspections, they certainly are in the UK!

Quote:

(btw, the only royal on the trip, Eugenie, never disguised herself nor misrepresented herself)

Eugenie went to Turkey, her sister went to Rumania. Both trips were with Chris Rogers and neither Sarah, Beatrice nor Eugenie were introduced as themselves. Beatrice and Sarah both had to make a hasty exit

Quote:

apparantly after being denied access as Sarah, Duchess of York. It is worth mentioning that this report was made three years ago, well after the EU supposedly was conducting these 'spot inspections'. The description sounds the same as it does now. Bang up job these inspectors are doing.

Apparently seems to be the operative word, although in all the excitement it is possible it was missed! There was still no reason, if this was indeed the case, to take her daughter, even more reprehensible, IMO.

Well, I for one - being a US citizen and living in the US - have never heard of anything even remotely close to what Sarah's documentary exposed. I vaguely remember there was a bit on the news for about a second years ago when the Soviet Union collapsed and someone showcased something about orphanages there (and in Romania around the same time), but there's been nothing about any of that since. European social problems are rarely covered here. So my eyes were def. opened to this on-going and terrible situation. I guess the real important thing now is what is going to be done about this?

The first programme of this sort of abuse aired in c1987, the next in 2006 and of course this one. The countries that are supporting Turkeys inclusion will continue to support them, mainly for their support over the war on terror. The EU will stick to it's "as long as you promise to change" you can join our club and life will go on as normal for these children. What Sarah has done, is make it twice as hard for any outside agencies to help these children and young adults, on top of that, she has embroiled the Royal Family in a political matter, that they can do nothing about!

As regards my last post--I don't think Sarah is, or really ever was, an asset to the monarchy. I do, however, think that in the early years of her marriage if someone she looked up to and respected--which is why I suggested the Queen--had attempted to mentor her, maybe she would have learned how to behave more appropriately and with all her goood qualities, she could have been a real asset to the RF. I think it's unfortunate that the Queen seems to have such a "hands off" policy in regards to her family, and maybe if she had been more involved, some of the scandals--and not just in regards to Sarah--might not have happened. I do think that Sarah turned out to be the worst thing that ever could have happened to the RF, and the best thing she could have done after her separation and divorce would have been to go away quietly, and raise her daughters. She had enough of a divorce settlement that she could have done this, without resorting to all her money-making and attention-getting schemes.